Virginia Department of Transportation v. Stevens

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that whether one of the employee’s two instances of alleged misconduct occurred was irrelevant to the disposition of the case because if one “incident warrant[ed] termination, it [did] not matter whether” the other incident also would
• stating that courts “review[] the facts developed in the agency record in the light most favorable to the party prevailing in that forum and defer[] to agency factfinding unless patently insubstantial”
• addressing the state grievance procedure in Code §§ 2.2-3000 to -3008
• rejecting claim based on agency’s “Standards of Conduct”
• rejecting claim based on agency’s “Standards of Conduct”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).